Quoting: Gryxx

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: WernerDay ~2237 Windows free :D^_^

but Welcome :)

It's nice here ^_^

How are you dealing with left control being non assignable?

EDIT: I mean in Overwatch

I believe you can remap your left-control to send a right-control signal by running this:
xmodmap -e "keycode 37 = Control_R"

Beware that I haven't tested this at all.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: MaathSo what if you have hundreds or thousands of games? Do you need to search for each one individually and "install" it into Lutris?

It's been a while since I used Lutris, but I believe it will auto-import everything you already have installed/available on Steam.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: stretch611

Quoting: TobyHaynes

Quoting: WernerDay ~2237 Windows free :D^_^

but Welcome :)

Day ~6300 Windows Free and that's only because my employer provided Windows NT on my first dev system. Once I figured out how to work around run certain tools under Wine, the rest is history.

Welcome!

Damn, I'm beaten... only about 3400 days here. 4200 days @95% free and I'm still not close.

My hats off to you @TobyHaynes

Oooh! This looks fun, let's see!

Day 6966 on Linux as my main system and day 4041 as Linux-only (since purging Windows off my DAW setup).

Welcome to the penguins-only club (that makes it cool, right?), Sin!
And well done, Lutris!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Shmerl

Quoting: Cybolicthough 144Hz would be pushing it

That's where adaptive sync should be helpful. Let's say you have monitor sync range 40 - 144 Hz. So anything in the range of 40 - 144 fps should be running smoothly.

[...]

Hopefully all this will be supported on Linux this year.

G-Sync already seems to do this quite well for me; I was actually referring to the FPS, not the Hz - sorry for the mess-up :)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Shmerl

Quoting: CybolicI'm running 100Hz with G-Sync enabled (on 3440x1440) and it's working fine for the most part; a few games need a helping hand, but it's mostly smooth sailing. Are you referring more to an available open / AMD solution or is 100Hz really the limit?

GPUs simply aren't powerful enough to run games at something like 144 Hz at 4K. Video above makes this point quite well. 2560 x 1440 / 144 Hz matches current generation hardware, at least if we are talking about single GPU solution.

Absolutely true for 4K, but 2.5K (or whatever one chooses to call 3440x1440) at 100Hz is manageable for many games (though 144Hz would be pushing it), as long as they're not too graphically/computationally expensive; luckily, the only one that's far from the mark in my library is "Total War: Warhammer", which doesn't absolutely require 100Hz anyway.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Shmerl

Quoting: CybolicP.S. A fun anecdotal video is one from Linus Tech Tips (4K Gaming is Dumb where even some of their people couldn't spot any difference between 60/144/240Hz whilst playing Doom 2016.

Totally agree. Refresh rate > resolution. And optimum today is indeed 2560 x 1440 / 144 Hz (with adaptive sync and LFC). Hopefully Linux will support that soon.

I'm running 100Hz with G-Sync enabled (on 3440x1440) and it's working fine for the most part; a few games need a helping hand, but it's mostly smooth sailing. Are you referring more to an available open / AMD solution or is 100Hz really the limit?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Hubro

Quoting: CybolicIt's highly subjective. In general, humans perceive anything over 25/30 FPS as "continuous" and anything over 60 FPS as "smooth" but most can distinguish between 30 and 60 FPS and quite a few can recognise changes between 60 and 120 FPS. Above that, things get extremely subjective and most people can't see any difference.

Dude no, that's absolutely not true. If you're talking about watching movies you might be right, but the extra responsiveness and smoothness you get from higher frame rates when gaming is *extremely* noticeable. The difference between 60hz and 120hz when gaming is MASSIVE. I can say that from personal experience and the testimony of everyone I know of who've tried a 120hz monitor. If you disagree, just try playing Counter Strike on a PC with a mouse and moving your crosshair back and forth quickly. If you honestly can't tell the difference at that point then you must have some kind of medical condition, or just terrible eye sight. I would consult a doctor (or optician, respectively.)

I found the jump from 120hz to 165hz very noticeable as well, although less so than 60 to 120. In my uneducated opinion, the difference in smoothness in some situations (like quickly turning 180 degrees in a first person shooter) will probably be somewhat noticeable up to around 240hz, maybe even further. I'd have to try it myself to be sure.

(Also if your entire comment was about *seeing* a difference, not *feeling* a difference while gaming, then I apologize in advance. A high frame rate is much less important when you're just watching the screen and not interacting in any way.)

I'm not speaking for myself. As I said in the first sentence, it's highly subjective; I can absolutely both see and feel the difference between 60 and 120Hz/FPS. If you look around at blind tests and consumer reports on monitors however, you'll see that a surprising amount of people don't notice any difference between a 60Hz and a 120Hz monitor, even in gaming tests.
Again "quite a few can recognise changes between 60 and 120 FPS", you and I included, but it's not everyone who can.

P.S. A fun anecdotal video is one from Linus Tech Tips (4K Gaming is Dumb where even some of their people couldn't spot any difference between 60/144/240Hz whilst playing Doom 2016.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

That is some lovely, lovely pixel art, palette work and design; really pulls of a nice atmosphere already!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Jiskin

Quoting: KristianI have often seen Linux ports or games running under Wine reduce performance by double digit FPS and/or % and people hailing that as acceptable since performance is still good and they may have an otherwise great point.

But if running a game under Wine reduces the FPS say from 150 to 100 or from 200 to 150 the general public will tend to perceive that as an utter failure and totally unacceptable. It will dissuade them from switching and the Linux marketshare will stay low.

Perception is everything. So it is crucial to get Linux performance as near to Windows performance as possible,if it can be faster even better.

Edit:

If I remember the numbers correctly, The Witcher 2 ports performance was bad enough that it is a way way bigger performance loss than what the general public would accept.

Also another attitude I have sometimes seen is "Oh it is fine that game is not DX11 exclusive, its DX9 mode works fine under Wine" neither the general public nor hardcore gamers share that attitude. They think: "Why should I switch to Linux if that means giving up eyecandy or features?".

Which is why projects such as DXVK are so important.

Afaik, the human eyes cannot percept any change above 30 fps.

It's highly subjective. In general, humans perceive anything over 25/30 FPS as "continuous" and anything over 60 FPS as "smooth" but most can distinguish between 30 and 60 FPS and quite a few can recognise changes between 60 and 120 FPS. Above that, things get extremely subjective and most people can't see any difference.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: WorMzyStarbase DF-9, is that you? :o

I quite liked Starbase DF-9, but it unfortunately left me both wanting more and scared to pour time into a similar game.
One of these days, one of these games will exit Early-Access and be reviewed well; that's when I'll be ready to go back to building my little space colony.

View this comment - View article - View full comments